2
What are
Brain Types ?
®
This book is devoted to helping you know and understand
your children and yourself more fully. By discovering your
child’s inborn God-given design, you will understand why his
or her mind works as it does—why children view matters and
make decisions as they do. You will also better understand
your child’s emotional makeup. Presented with the physical
and athletic perspective, you will know what your child’s body
is capable of doing and to what degree. Socially, you will have
a better handle on why your children tend to regard others as
they do, and, spiritually, you may better grasp how each child
relates to God.
The study of human behavior has attracted many theorists
over the course of time. The field of psychology is more
than simply the study of the psyche or mind; it is primarily
the investigation of human behavior—yet from a limited
perspective. Those who study the behavior of others have
tried for ages to explain both the rational and irrational acts of
16 • BRAIN TYPES® AND PARENTING
humankind. Or, as someone put it, “Psychology is the study
of what makes people tick—and what ticks them off.”
Most of us tend to have questions about the area of
“personality.” What do I mean by personality? It is the sum
total of the various traits, attitudes and characteristics of an
individual that can be identified and described. There are
definite patterns of behavior among people. These traits set
people apart from others who demonstrate a different set
or pattern of behavior. Yet, as we look more carefully, what
appears to be random behavior in people is, in fact, quite
orderly and predictable. Dr. Walter Lowen, behavioral scientist
and engineer, once stated:
I marvel at the order in nature. Whenever some new secret
of nature is revealed, what is uncovered is a new, beautiful,
simple ordering scheme, be it a periodic table, the structure
of crystals, the atom, or DNA. I believe intelligence, too,
has its explanation in some basic order.1
Over time, researchers “determined” that these patterns
translate into “personality types” or “psychological types.”
However, almost four decades of empirical research and
advances in modern science in the 21st century have
demonstrated that Brain Types® is the most accurate way to
classify people and understand their behavior. Rather than
categorizing people by vague personality nuances, which are
impacted by both nature and nurture, Brain Typing relies
upon inborn traits—both mental and physical. These traits
are predetermined and fixed, making them easier to identify.
A word of caution: Do you sense that ascribing specific
genetic, inborn Brain Types to people is like putting them
in boxes, providing them little or no room for growth or
WHAT ARE BRAIN TYPES? • 17
flexibility? Do you suspect the practice could become
demeaning or restricting? It is true that categorizing can be
counterproductive; therefore, two questions must be asked:
(1) Is the categorization true and accurate, and (2) is it used
in a constructive way? One of the biggest and quite legitimate
complaints with modern-day “personality” testing has to do
with inaccuracy, evidenced by the fact that many people test
out as a different “personality” when taking the same test
multiple times.
Have you ever considered how you might classify people?
After all, most everyone does. Many use cultural distinctions
such as social, financial, and educational status, or religion. It
has become common in today’s society to make distinctions
based upon superficial factors such as skin color, gender, and
stature. Many people even place mental labels on others daily,
like “smart,” “dumb,” and “average.”
Brain Typing is solely intended for constructive use with
the goal that we are all able to view others in an educated,
rational, appreciative fashion, without making disparaging
conclusions.
Jung-Myers Typology
We owe much of what we know about individual
differences to the late Swiss psychiatrist and psychologist,
Dr. Carl Gustav Jung, who is regarded as the founder of the
modern theory of psychological type, or typology. Jung said:
It was one of the greatest experiences of my life to discover
how enormously different people’s psyches are.2
Jung believed that specific patterns, types, or combinations
of preferences in humans could be described and categorized.
18 • BRAIN TYPES® AND PARENTING
Please note that I am referring to Jung’s typology as opposed
to his psychology—of which I am not an advocate.
There are pairs of preferences which he, and later, Isabel
Myers, explained and developed. A preference, they concurred,
is the conscious or unconscious choice an individual makes
in a certain designated realm. These eight preferences are
Extraversion (E), Introversion (I), Sensation (S), iNtuition
(N), Thinking (T), Feeling (F), Judging (J), and Perceiving (P).
Each preference is paired with its opposite. Thus an individual
is considered to be either Extraverted or Introverted, Sensing
or iNtuitive, Thinking or Feeling, and Judging or Perceiving.
Every individual’s personality is represented by a combination
of four preferences, expressed as a series of four letters. An
ISFP, for example, is considered to be an individual who is an
Introvert, Sensate, Feeler, and is Perceptive. In all, there are
16 different combinations of the preferences making up the
different Jung-Myers personality types, each with a unique
description.
This preference analysis does not involve questions of
good and bad. There are no superior personality types and
no inferior types. Rather, Jung and later Myers pointed out
major differences in people’s perspectives, shedding substantial
light on why people behave as they do.
It is interesting to note that, while much of “personality”
research over the years involved study of the behavior of
“abnormal” people (schizophrenics, mentally ill, etc.), Carl
Jung’s discerning personality evaluations were based upon
observing “normal” behavior in thousands of people over the
course of his lifetime.
In the same way, the uncovering of Brain Types stems
from a detailed, intense evaluation of “normal” behavior of
WHAT ARE BRAIN TYPES? • 19
tens of thousands of individuals. In the year 1973, just a few
years after graduating from college, I seriously considered the
study of human behavior for the first time. This pursuit has
preoccupied me to this day, and surely will for the rest of my
life. It began as a necessity for hiring, but it did not take long
before I was enthralled with the variations in people’s conduct.
Not only did I want to know why they were the way they
were, but I felt compelled to seek some order in their many
mannerisms. Motivated by how this could enhance my life
personally and professionally, I also saw it as an intellectual
project, a way my curious and analytic mind could be engaged
in the process of making order out of chaos. How could
an accurate and structured system be derived from such a
hodgepodge of personas?
As I became exposed to the world of “personality” or
“psychological” types in the 1970s, I was greatly frustrated by
their strong link to the abstract and ethereal “mind.” Having
a “concrete” and “tangible” mindset, I was compelled to take
this conceptual typology and give it flesh—to establish a
biological basis if at all possible. I had previously demonstrated
a penchant for trying to find order in other facets of life’s
ambiguities, but this new undertaking seemed overwhelming.
I was not afraid of the time commitment or the mental
gymnastics that might be required, but the formidable task
of finding reliable classifications among the thousands of
personalities I had already experienced with others, as well as
the millions and billions I had not was certainly daunting.
In an effort to better understand, I attended numerous
meetings and seminars (both local and national) relating to
typological theory. I soon realized that the vast majority of
“typology experts” speaking on the subject were abstract,
20 • BRAIN TYPES® AND PARENTING
conceptual people, who were significantly lacking in practical
application. While they possessed a thorough theoretical
understanding of “Type,” my common sense persuaded
me that they were quite deficient in identifying its specific
attributes in people. The result was that they came to rely on
subjective questionnaires to provide results. Because people
of different mindsets and experiences are inclined to interpret
and thus, respond to questionnaires differently (and have blind
spots regarding their behavior), it is inevitable that the results
are inconsistent and unreliable.
Typology Limitations and Flaws
In her insightful book, The Cult of Personality Testing, Annie
Murphy Paul points out that:
“One investigation (conducted by [MBTI] proponents,
no less) found that the percentage of people who achieved
the same four-part type across two administrations of the
test was only 47 percent. In other words, more than half
of those who took the Myers-Briggs were given a different
type when they took the same questionnaire a short while
later.”
She goes on to write, “Another study discovered that
individuals’ types may change even according to the time
of day. Its authors described one subject, for example, who
‘was a good intuitive thinker in the afternoon but not in
the morning.’ One of the most thorough appraisals of the
Myers-Briggs appears in ‘In the Mind’s Eye,’ an evaluation
of ‘performance-enhancing techniques’ commissioned by
the National Research Council. Published in 1991, the
report notes that a variety of studies have found that 24 to
WHAT ARE BRAIN TYPES? • 21
61 percent of test takers receive the same Myers-Briggs type
when reexamined at intervals ranging from five weeks to
six years. That means, of course, that 39 to 76 percent are
assigned a different type.” 3
Even back in the ’70s, I could see that ineffectual testing
procedures and the inability to accurately identify the traits
in people were skewing the proper and consistent application
of typology. To convince myself (and others), I knew it had
to be measured tangibly and accurately.
Going back to Carl Jung, it is important to understand
that he coined “function types” and “psychological types,”
being quite precise in his labels. He knew that he had
identified commonly shared, yet distinguishable behavioral
characteristics in the thousands of people he had studied. His
era did not possess 21st century neuroscientific and genetic
evidence; therefore he had to rely on ideas of psychology (the
study of the mind), and his empirical observations of people
(as I do empirically observe others, yet with an emphasis on
modern-day scientific understanding). Thus, “psychological
types” was a most appropriate label for Jung. Before long,
however, people started using personality types to describe
Jung’s classifications, rendering a vernacular more relevant
to the layperson, removing it from the mysterious and often
abstract world of psychological theories.
“Personality” to the layperson conveys the sum total of the
mental, emotional, and social characteristics of an individual.
The term “personality,” however, originates from the Latin
“persona.” It corresponds to the Greek word for face. Actors
in ancient Greece could perform more than one role on stage
by donning different personas or masks. But type behavior
is not dictated primarily by the faces we randomly choose to
22 • BRAIN TYPES® AND PARENTING
wear.
As I studied this intensely, both through my empirical
observation and through modern-day advances in neuroscience,
genetics, and biomechanics, I came to the conclusion that there
had to be a stronger association between one’s preprogrammed
brain and body traits than anyone ever imagined. In other
words, individual inborn genetics regulated most of our mental
and physical behaviors throughout an entire lifetime! In
addition, since I was not a psychologist nor did I want to be
connected to humanistic psychology, I consciously attempted
to distance myself—seeking only scientific explanations.
I sought to figure out for myself, without pre-existing bias,
what was at work here. Now, generally noticing how each
person around you speaks, looks, and moves is not a difficult
task. Meticulously and painstakingly noticing each person in
your presence daily is much more overwhelming. Hindsight
has convinced me that only a person heavily engaged in the
back of the brain (true Introversion), one who is left-brain
WHAT ARE BRAIN TYPES? • 23
dominant—the conscious and methodical hemisphere, having
a mind fixated on “what is” (Sensing), more than “what could
be,” and being more predisposed to logic (Thinking) than
feelings is best suited for the task and could actually endure
this grueling venture over a number of decades. While I did
not consciously realize it at the time (though I am quite sure
it is what led me to walk this road), I was innately (and if I
may humbly say providentially) designed for the job.
A New Challenge
Before I knew it, fifteen years of primarily empirical
research had been spent delving deeply into human behavior.
During this time period (the early ’80s), I published the
findings in my first book. I had also already explored the
scientific connections to personality and behavior and found
them to be few and superficial, even among academics.
Psychology continued to be immersed in theory, while science
was making no serious attempt to quantify human behavior.
Needless to say, neither of them considered the mind-motor
connection. So a new challenge confronted me—that of taking
it to another level.
Throughout my empirical studies, I had become convinced
that there were significant scientific reasons behind behavior,
and they needed to be unveiled; there was far more than
“nurture” or environmental influences at work. If academia
failed to have answers, I felt driven to strike out on my own
search. Though they had the funding and latest in technology,
I realized that what I had gleaned in my years of athletic
behavior and research, combined with my inborn predilection
for studying people, provided me a uniquely advantageous
framework with which to proceed.
24 • BRAIN TYPES® AND PARENTING
In previous years I had sought the insight and teaching
of those within neuroscience, psychiatry, and psychology, so I
returned to them for counsel. They had become supportive of
my research and findings, and believed scientific explanations
would prove them someday. They knew that their academic
disciplines lagged behind what I had uncovered, that there was
no curriculum leading in this direction, and that scientific (and
psychological) orthodoxy was not yet prepared to accept my
conclusions; too many political hurdles had to be overcome.
The consensus of their counsel was for me to go at it alone,
outside the confines of restrictive academia, though this would
ensure difficulty. They encouraged me to also take the best
from each of their fields and continue assembling the pieces
of this new human understanding.
Looking back on their counsel reminds me today of
scientific pioneer and Nobel Prize winner, geneticist Sydney
Brenner. Born to uneducated parents, he taught himself to
read and even established a mini-laboratory in his garage by
age 10. In 2002, at age 75, he was one of three recipients of
the world’s most prestigious award in Medicine. A founder
of modern molecular genetics, he proved the existence of
messenger RNA and demonstrated the genetic code. Brenner,
founder of the Molecular Sciences Institute, has been known
for stating that one should consider being trained outside
the field of discovery in order to approach a new exploration
without bias and restraints.
Consider Roger Brent, President and CEO of the Molecular
Sciences Institute, who was challenged by Brenner to venture
outside the box and how it made a dramatic and positive
change in his life. Quoting Brent, “I started corresponding
with Sydney Brenner, who founded the Institute in June 1996.
WHAT ARE BRAIN TYPES? • 25
He had a very similar take on things. Sydney bluntly told me
that to pursue my interests, I would have to step outside the
system. I was then about 40 years old and a scientific risk-taker,
but needed that push from Brenner to make it work.”4
Brent’s extensive writings and intensive investigations into
predictive biology have rewarded him with genetic acclaim,
including numerous U.S. Patents. He and many other wise
pioneers through the ages have learned that to make avantgarde discoveries, one often needs to enter uncharted waters—
not staying within “system,” or academic orthodoxy.
Though I had been both graduated from college and
married nearly twenty years by this time, with three young
children to raise and feed, I opted to curtail my incomeproducing efforts and devote time to intensive scientific
research. Fortunately, I could live off investments for a while.
Five years flew by like one. Finally my labors brought results
and meaningful new answers (though my funds were nearly
depleted). I had attained another level of understanding,
especially regarding the brain, genetics, and biomechanic
movements in relationship to Brain Types.
By 1992, I was able to encapsulate my years of evidence and
publish a dissertation. Though I had much to convey regarding
brain and body science, the majority was devoted to how
significantly Brain Types affected all athletic endeavors. My
nearly 400-page, 8½x11 book was titled Your Best Sport: How
to Choose and Play it (later it was changed to Your Key to Sports
Success). Some twenty of America’s top sports were covered,
describing in detail how the 16 Brain Types performed in each
and how they could achieve optimal sports success based upon
their individual inborn giftedness. Virtually every year since
’92, I have published new editions of this book, updating it
26 • BRAIN TYPES® AND PARENTING
with the most recent athletes and Brain Type findings.
Upon completing my sports book, I knew I had a good
handle on each of the Brain Types, both mentally and
physically. Yet around that period I met a person who would
put my new understanding to the test like never before. Not
only was he a psychologist, but also an accomplished sports
scientist and legendary tennis coach. If anyone knew how
both mind and body were linked, it was internationally known
Vic Braden. We lived within a half hour of one another in
Southern California, and he invited me to participate in
a research project at his tennis college. As someone who
was originally a skeptic of Brain Types, Braden wanted to
objectively and scientifically test both this new science and
my ability to apply it. Though it would take a few years to
complete and involve 100 test subjects I had never met before,
I agreed to the challenge.
In a nutshell, I would briefly meet each test subject and
then tell Braden his or her Brain Type and how they would
perform on the tennis court or any other physical exercise he
chose to put them through—and this was without them telling
me anything about their athletic abilities or watching them
move in any way. Basically everything that was done was video
recorded for validation purposes. At the end of each testing
session, I would then give the participant a rather lengthy
rundown on his or her abilities and off-the-court behavior
that had never been shown to me or spoken about. Time and
again I was told I had to be psychic, that there was no way I
could know all the things about them that I did. For those
who get to know me, I am the least psychic person they will
likely ever meet. In fact, Vic Braden is on record saying that
he has more intuitive abilities in his armpit than I have in my
WHAT ARE BRAIN TYPES? • 27
brain!
After a few years of this rigorous testing, both Braden and
all test subjects stated I was right on target—beyond their
expectations. In fact, one test subject outside the original
100 was a Ph.D. research scientist. We spoke for one minute
before I was able to tell him about himself and his Brain Type
for at least a half hour—mentally and physically, without ever
moving him from his chair. Though reticent to comment
for professional reasons, he went on record and said that I
was “remarkably and disturbingly accurate”—that there was
seemingly no way I could have known such things about him,
without Brain Typing having validity. This kind of reaction is
often expressed when I Type someone. My assessments seem
miraculous to those without Brain Type awareness, but to those
who do understand this insightful science, the evaluations are
as easy to understand as a botanist with a plant, an arborist
with a tree, or a veterinarian with an animal.
Also in the mid-1990s, Brain Typing achieved the next
level of understanding. My genetic testing of hundreds of
people opened another doorway. Yet another decade would
pass before genetic sophistication could finally help to classify
Brain Types in the human genome. Though the costs have
been exorbitant to test large groups of people (which is
necessary, considering there are 16 dissimilar Brain Types)
and genetic testing is still limited, significant strides have been
made in identifying the various inborn designs. Our goal is to
make available to the public a saliva diagnostic test that will
distinguish all 16 designs.
During the past few decades I have additionally collaborated
with and been mentored by neuroscientists, learning how to
study brain imaging techniques—such as fMRI, PET, and
28 • BRAIN TYPES® AND PARENTING
SPECT scans—and relate them to the various Brain Types.
I have also been trained in QEEG, often taking my portable
unit when traveling, testing willing subjects along the way. My
knowledge of Brain Types and these experiences have provided
me an advantage over other researchers when reviewing data
from a person who has been imaged or mapped.
A prime reason for conflicting brain study results among
academics and clinicians is the lack of awareness of inborn
neurological differences with test subjects. As a result,
cognitive research done without the knowledge of Brain Types
is limited and often misleading. Brain Types can bring clarity
to many contradictory studies, though it usually will not
account for cerebral patterns and problems incurred during a
person’s lifetime. Knowing a test subject’s Brain Type enables
a researcher to more easily classify and comprehend each
case. For example, when two subjects have Front Right brain
dysfunction in the same Broadmann’s area, and it adversely
affects Brain Type #9 more than #4 (a significant difference
you will learn more about in the pages ahead), Brain Types
provides the optimal explanation, and will likely offer the
best counsel to the patient— custom tailoring it based upon
genetic uniqueness.
A Different Kind of Obstacle
One final aspect of this journey is noteworthy. For the
first 25 years of my research and consulting efforts, I found
little resistance. It certainly wasn’t that I avoided skepticism
by some along the way, but the dubious were civil, and a
number of them were open-minded; with time and dialogue,
the latter became convinced and are still on board today. (In
all the decades I have conveyed my research to others, I have yet
WHAT ARE BRAIN TYPES? • 29
to meet someone who has carefully looked into Brain Types and
rejected it.)
In the latter 1990s, after I had received national
recognition, a few psychologists sought to discredit me. This
was in contrast to the many psychologists who were supportive
of Brain Typing—knowing it was not only useful to their
practice, but it would also help bring psychology scientific
credibility.
The few outspoken critics neither contacted me nor sought
to gain an understanding of Brain Types. Rather, they spent
their time employing red herring, ad hominem, and straw man
attacks. The science of Brain Types was not challenged; only
misleading issues were raised. In fact, one said as a point of
contention, “Nothing like this has ever been achieved before.”
Just think, if society employed this kind of rationale to all
discoveries, would not human progress be impeded?
These antagonists also attacked the scientists who had
publicly supported my research, attempting to intimidate them
within their academic circles. Many in science were surprised
at the psychologists’ unprofessional antics. For me personally,
I learned some valuable lessons—one of which was to proceed
more cautiously with what I disclose and its timing. I was
also reminded that, unfortunately—for some people, agendas
trump truth-seeking.
In summary, my nearly four-decade journey trying to
quantify some typological theories with the hard sciences
has been arduous but well worth it. Little did I realize the
depth of understanding that would be uncovered regarding
inborn human designs. I can assure you that my Brain Type
would have much preferred an easier route, operating within
the jurisdiction of orthodoxy. Those who know me loudly
30 • BRAIN TYPES® AND PARENTING
attest I am among the staunchest defenders of tradition and
boundaries, but not when I believe that truth has been set
aside for the sake of conformity.
Gregor Mendel
Consider the story of Gregor Mendel, a 19th century
monk and amateur botanist, whose work regarding plants and
principles of heredity was scientifically rejected at the time
it was revealed. Only decades after he died did his theories
become widely accepted to the point that he is considered
today by many to be the “father of modern genetics.”
M.D. and Ph.D. Nancy Andreasen highlighted the story
of Mendel in her book, Brave New Brain: Conquering Mental
Illness in the Era of the Genome.
Human beings have observed for many years that normal
and abnormal traits are transmitted within families—e.g.,
eye color, hair color,... The process by which much of
this transmission occurs was formalized through the
painstaking observations of Gregor Mendel... In the
mid-1860s, he conducted meticulous experiments... on
plant life.
Mendel’s observations, which we now refer to as “classic
Mendelian patterns of transmission,” created the framework
within which genes and genetic transmission are currently
understood. Mendel did not know he was studying the
effects of genes because the word ‘gene’ had not yet been
coined. He was observing “traits” or “factors.”
This Austrian monk was able to simply observe
what happened to his pea plants based on experimental
manipulation, and to deduce the principles of genetics...
WHAT ARE BRAIN TYPES? • 31
when he did not know that genes existed! All he could see
were plants that varied on multiple traits.
We can summarize Mendel’s observations and
conclusions by using modern terminology. Mendel was
observing the phenotype, but behind the phenotype was
a genotype... Mendel could not see the genotype—only
the phenotype. Nonetheless, he inferred the presence
of something that must represent a genotype, since this
was the most plausible explanation of the patterns of
transmission that he was observing.5
Gregor Mendel was an amazing and exceptional monk. His
longtime fascination with plants resulted in observations
never before noticed. His empirical approach provided the
foundation for modern genetics.
Similarly, I have not come to the conclusions that I have
regarding the mind and body easily. It is only after 30-plus
years of painstakingly scrutinizing individual and inborn
human traits—cognitive, motor and spatial—that I have come
to a novel understanding of what is at work.
Just as Mendel “saw” only what is now known to be a
“phenotype,” he “inferred the presence of something that
must represent a genotype, since this was the most plausible
explanation of the patterns of transmission that he was
observing.” In a similar way, I deduced (first, more than 30
years ago) from what is now called Brain Types “the presence
of something that must represent a genotype, since this was the
most plausible explanation of the patterns” I was continually
observing.
I discovered that for the mental, motor, and spatial skills
to be regularly repeated by those of the same Brain Type,
yet having different ages, sexes, and (what many incorrectly
32 • BRAIN TYPES® AND PARENTING
describe as) races, it mandated a genetic basis.
Mendel and Me
Whereas Gregor Mendel studied nearly 30,000 pea
plants over a 7-year period (during part of Abraham Lincoln’s
presidency) to reach his major conclusions, it has been
estimated that I have made over 50,000 human assessments
during three decades—and each additional evaluation only
continues to reinforce earlier conclusions. Please do not
misunderstand. I continue to observe and learn more Brain
Type nuances virtually every day, but they only serve to further
expand and support facts I gathered previously. The body and
mind connections became apparent to me early in the process,
and I became convinced of the intrinsic genetic components
of Brain Types during the 1980s—a little more than a century
after Mendel’s research.
Succinctly stated, my empirical studies quantifying human
behavior are extensive. They accelerated appreciably when
I began coaching my children in youth sports in the early
1980s. From their peewee ball up through high school, my
late afternoons and weekends were nearly non-stop coaching
baseball, basketball, and soccer (exceeding 50 teams) for over a
decade. Observing up close and interacting with these young
athletes became my first comprehensive laboratory, and here
I was able to ascertain the astounding link between behavior
and motor movements.
Not only was I able to carefully evaluate and develop each
player on my team(s), but I was able to view and monitor
the thousands of youngsters we competed against (yet I did
not consider those to be official assessments). It did not take
long to Brain Type and discover specific idiosyncrasies of
WHAT ARE BRAIN TYPES? • 33
competitors we faced and then pass along some of this helpful
information to my young players.
I especially did this with my two sons, who I could teach
on a daily basis. In baseball, for example, by the time my
oldest son, Jeremy, was 12 years old, he knew the Brain Type
of most opposing hitters he faced while on the mound. Armed
with this understanding, he proceeded to throw pitches that
would expose their specific Brain Type weaknesses. (Isn’t all
fair in war, politics, and youth sports?)
Please allow me to get briefly sidetracked. In all
seriousness, I do not approve of the “all’s fair” philosophy—
and this includes in war, politics, and youth sports; I cannot
condone violating the Golden Rule or implementing deception
in any form, except by legitimate rules and principles in
sports, recreational games, and so on. I do, however, believe
it acceptable to use the latest technology or insight to one’s
advantage when implemented ethically. In addition, I
have always tried to offer my insights to others, including
competitors.
In my college and professional sports consulting to this
day, I continue to offer these insights to my clients, as they
seek the greatest competitive edge. I not only still try to offer
Brain Types to everyone in my sphere of relationships, but
for the first time in my life I am striving to bring it to the
masses—both at home and abroad.
Sometimes a consulting contract will not allow me to offer
my services to competitors, and this is understandable and
ethical. With all the scientific advances and benefits in Brain
Types, however, I expect it will not be long before it becomes
universally known. As with the embracing of computers, there
will be strong needs, both “felt” and “real,” for people to gain
34 • BRAIN TYPES® AND PARENTING
a heightened understanding of inborn human behavior with
Brain Types.
Now back to my youth coaching: My boys and I soon
realized it was a lot easier to identify a competitor’s Brain
Type than it was to remember his name; it became a means
of mental “pegging.” The way each child moved, acted, and
looked provided a quick reminder again of his respective Brain
Type.
My coaching success at the youth level (a result of
implementing Brain Type analysis) brought many inquiries
from the higher levels, all the way up to the pros. Word of
mouth and media exposure brought attention from many
sources. It did not take long before I was teaching Brain Typing
to teams and athletes at both the collegiate and professional
levels. Soon working in America’s Big Three—the highest
levels of pro baseball, basketball, and football, I was now
evaluating and Brain Typing over a thousand athletes a year,
especially as they performed prior to the annual drafts in each
sport. The NFL Combine, NBA pre-draft camps and MLB
pre-draft workouts were events of special interest for me. These
venues often brought the greatest young athletes in the world
to one location for workouts; my laboratory was expanding.
Now even extending around the world, for example, I usually
travel to Italy yearly, where I am able to watch the top young
foreign basketball players, just prior to the annual NBA Draft.
I have also watched thousands of aspiring pro athletes on
video and television. Though this approach is not as insightful
as being there in person, it nonetheless can provide valuable
information. Particularly with recent technological advances
in HD (digital high-definition), I am now able to assess more
athletes and others than ever before, without ever leaving my
WHAT ARE BRAIN TYPES? • 35
office.
Whether Brain Typing athletes and sports management,
business people, students and teachers, politicians, or downand-outers on street corners, I see the world (home and abroad)
as my expanded laboratory. No matter whether in a formal
office setting or meeting someone on-the-go who has time to
chat—whenever a special opportunity presents itself—I feel
the need to take it. Who knows what I may learn next, or
who I might meet?
Gregor Mendel has been an inspiration for me, and I only
wish he could have received due praise for his remarkable
insights and honorable efforts while he was still alive. Sadly,
it was decades following his death that the world finally
began to acknowledge his invaluable contributions. He
died a discouraged man, unsupported in his unfathomable
unearthing. Yet, like so many accomplished pioneers before
him, he was ahead of his time, misunderstood, unappreciated,
and yes, even ridiculed by the closed-minded, mean-spirited,
highly educated, and insecure of his day.
Where Mendel only had thousands of impersonal pea
plants to interface with in his extended research, I have been
immensely privileged to have so many wonderful interviews
with thousands of personable people, whom I never would
have appreciated sooo much without the marvelous insight of
human heavenly creations, or Brain Types.
36 • BRAIN TYPES® AND PARENTING
BRAIN TYPES®
Defined
Brain Types is the new science of classifying all people
the world over into 16 genetic groupings, each masters of
specific inborn mental and physical skills.
While independent studies and experiences led me to
concur that there are sixteen basic “types” (with additional
sub-classifications), my understanding concerning the various
types came to be quite different from the norm. I distinguish
these differing designs as Brain Types—found in all people the
world over—each with unique and inborn mental/cognitive,
physical/motor and visual/spatial proficiencies.
Though personas can vary significantly within individuals
of each Brain Type (due to nurture: parenting, upbringing,
etc., and nature: genetic variances, etc.), my years of research
have led me to an undeniable conclusion. That is, differing
inborn neural networks in each Brain Type affect specific cognitive,
physical, and spatial skills, and similarities within each design
are due to genetic hardwiring—nature.
I have built upon the empirical data collected by Jung and
subsequent protagonists of his by applying neuroscientific,
genetic, biomechanic, and vision studies implemented by
others, those with whom I have collaborated, and myself.
My attempt has been to take Jung’s “soft” typological findings
into the 21st century “hard” sciences for verification. These
efforts have left me with no doubt that Jung (and his modernday devotees) was (and are) on the right track. I believe,
however, they are far removed from the accuracy and scientific
understanding now available for evaluating human behavior
(cognitive, physical, and spatial).
Not only do I believe that Jung’s original “type” preferences
WHAT ARE BRAIN TYPES? • 37
and functions can be attributed to specific regions of the
brain, but they can be directly linked to specific motor and
spatial skills, especially via the brain’s motor cortex. Whereas
Jung’s followers have devoted their attentions to outward
personality characteristics, my studies and experience have
led me to minimize outward persona and focus instead on
internal biological and physical characteristics that dictate
cognitive, physical, and spatial behaviors. I am most interested
in the quantifiable and verifiable physiological behavioral
dimensions—to be applied pragmatically to living life.
As I stated earlier, I am not a psychologist, nor do I practice
psychology. In that vein, Brain Typing is not a form of psychology.
Rather, it is a maturing science devoted to identifying and
understanding inborn traits/skills—mental (cognitive),
physical (motor), and spatial (visual). Because each Brain Type
is most proficient in its brain regions of uniqueness, all people
the world over—sharing the same Brain Type—have similar
tendencies in these three significant areas. Therefore, Brain
Typing does not specifically measure someone’s personality
or psychological bent (though it often reveals persona traits
common to each Type); rather it reveals an understanding of
what is considered “Nature” (vs. “Nurture”). In the Appendix
at the end of this book, however, an explanation is provided
that should help you to better understand the many differing
looks within each Brain Type.
I have found Brain Typing to be the most accurate
methodology for evaluating and describing man’s inborn
“normal” behavior—mentally and physically. I strongly
suspect that each of the 16 Brain Types will one day have
comprehensive sub-classifications—based upon other
variables, especially genetic. In the mid-1990s, I collaborated
38 • BRAIN TYPES® AND PARENTING
on a genetic study regarding particular brain neurotransmitters.
With similar results, outside studies demonstrated that various
neurotransmitter polymorphisms (transmitters having many
forms) affect personality and behavior. Consequently, since
that time I have pursued this course—examining differences
within like Brain Types.
Identifying the DNA components of each Brain Type in
the 21st century is a far more arduous task than examining
Mendel’s plant traits. Nonetheless, my collaboration with
geneticists for over 15 years has furthered my resolve to give
greater credence to the genetic diversity within each Brain
Type. This has helped to give an account for the relatively
minor differences (in most cases) I find within each inborn
design—though I continue to believe that all people clearly fall
into one and only one of the 16 Brain Types. In considering
what I espouse, I encourage you to also keep abreast of
published genetic studies that increasingly demonstrate the
idea that man’s “normal” behavior is genetically-based. Recent
studies have even placed the ratio at two-thirds “nature” to
one-third “nurture” impacting human behavior—a ratio I
postulated decades ago (when it was very unpopular).
On the following page is the similar yet distinct
nomenclature that Brain Types uses to provide a greater, deeper
understanding of and appreciation for our inherent designs
over traditional Jung-Myers terminology.
WHAT ARE BRAIN TYPES? • 39
Brain Types® Terminology
(F) Front-brain dominant – similar to “Extraversion”: anterior,
forepart, energy-expending, external, expressive, broad, many
(B) Back-brain dominant – similar to “Introversion”: posterior,
rear, energy-conserving, internal, reflective, deep, few
(E) Empirical – similar to “Sensing”: observe, experience, literal,
concrete, actual, realistic, 5 senses, pragmatic, “what is”
(C) Conceptual – similar to “iNtuitive”: imagine, envision,
figurative, abstract, theoretical, idealistic, “sixth” sense,
visionary, “what could be”
(A) Animate – similar to “Feeling”: living, persons, emotion,
compassion, encourage, feelings, subjective, relational
(I) Inanimate – similar to “Thinking”: non-living, things, logic,
justice, critique, issues, objective, systematic
(L) Left-brain dominant – similar to “Judging”: analytic,
divisible, local, ordered, sequential, mechanical, detailed,
speech-skilled, exact solution, resistant to interruptions,
skilled at reading and writing, numerical and verbal logic,
work-oriented
(R) Right-brain dominant – similar to “Perceiving”: synthetic,
holistic, universal, adaptable, multiple, graceful, artistic,
spatial adeptness—peripherally, etc., pattern-skilled,
sufficient solution, welcoming of interruptions, skilled at
drawing and sculpting, spatial and visual logic, play-oriented
40 • BRAIN TYPES® AND PARENTING
WHAT ARE BRAIN TYPES?
summary
• Brain Types is the new science of classifying all people the
world over into 16 genetic groupings, each masters of
specific inborn mental and physical skills.
• It was developed by Jonathan P. Niednagel with a method
of empirical research similar to that of amateur botanist,
Gregor Mendel.
• It has its roots in extensive observational research first
conducted by Dr. Carl Jung and later expanded upon
by Katherine Briggs and Isabel Myers.
• Jonathan Niednagel has refined this methodology and
cultivated Brain Types through his personal empirical
study of over an estimated 50,000 people. In addition,
he has collaborated with top experts in the fields of
neuroscience, genetics, biomechanics, and vision.
• Brain Types utilizes four basic dichotomies:
Front-brain dominant (F) vs. Back-brain dominant (B)
Empirical (E) vs. Conceptual (C)
Animate (A) vs. Inanimate (I)
Left-brain dominant (L) vs. Right-brain dominant (R)